Friday, 9 April 2010

Labour off on wrong foot

The argument about increasing National Insurance has set Labour's election campaign off on the wrong foot. Having a number of CEOs of companies, some of them household names, criticise the policy is not helpful to say the least, particularly given that Labour tried to present itself as 'the natural party of business'. Indeed, it had some initial success in doing so, but there has been growing resentment among business people in recent years about what they see as the growing burden of taxation and regulation.

Labour is trying to recover by saying that the Conservative figures don't add up. This is, however, quite a complicated argument for voters to follow. What is emerging is a more traditional and clearer choice between Labour as a 'tax and spend' party and the Conservatives as a party with a mission to reduce taxes.


A Spectator of Life said...

Labour do seem to be a bit unsteady at the start of this election trail

(also new tactical politics blog check it out :D)

Anonymous said...


Assuming the Conservatives win, do you think Cameron will make any changes to his current shadow cabinet line-up? For instance changing Osborne as Chancellor or Grayling as Home Secretary?

Anonymous said...

If I live in a constituency that has a very large majority and has historically been say, Labour, should I vote? Does my vote make a difference or matter. Is there an academic theory/response to this?

Wyn Grant said...

In response to the last comment, the total national vote could count if no party has an overall majority. It could affect the stance of the Liberal Democrats. As for the second question, I think that Osborne will be appointed initially as Chancellor. How long he will last is another matter. Grayling's position is more uncertain.